Grownups In The Cafeteria: When Both Candidates Are Horrible

I remember my school days in the 1970’s at Edison Elementary in Gainesville, Texas, in which the cafeteria was the breeding ground for infantile conflict and border skirmishes. It was the one place in which we didn’t have our teacher watching us, so we felt a little freer. Food fights, overturned seats, food-pranks—they all comprised our typical school days. But maintaining order throughout the cafeteria was a cadre of other faculty grownups who were really in charge. And they kept the school day largely free from incident by their presence on the scene. The more I think about it, the more I think this is a great metaphor for the 2016 election.

There are few things more outrageously ironic than when Democrats and the Media (but I repeat myself) parrot the myth that the Left is the sole locus of intelligent people and the Right is the wing of rubes and dolts. The Left did its dead-level best to nominate a doddering old crank who represents the most dangerous failed global experiment in the history of civilization (it’s only killed off 100 million people—let’s give it another chance!). There are no new ideas on the Left; only the recycling of tired ones that have long been rejected by thinking people everywhere except in Sociology departments. Meanwhile, since the decade after the New Deal, the Right has been fueled by a thinking class that has ably demonstrated the means by which our country may preserve the First Principles of our Founding. There are unprincipled people on both sides of the aisle, to be sure: Bill Clinton’s “triangulation” betrayed the Left’s grim march toward total collectivism, and the Chamber of Commerce-style Republicans who believe that they only win by promising “Democrat Lite” are two prime examples. In the pursuit of power, both wings of this country’s political brain are abandoning principles in favor of candidates who can “win.” To the principled in both parties, this is nothing new. On the right, we’ve had to hold our noses and pull the lever in Presidential elections for a solid streak of Gerald Fords: George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush, John McCain, Mitt Romney. Each of these men were more “Republican” than “conservative,” and they wouldn’t have been elected without the support of the thinking, principled conservatives who fuel the Right.

McCain and Romney were not elected. Meanwhile, the largest Presidential landslide in history goes to a candidate who was not only unapologetically conservative, but exceedingly great at communicating it to his fellow Americans. Let that fact sink in. Since the GOP can’t seem to be able to.

Rather than learn a lesson from this, the GOP has once again found a Democrat to bear its standard. And the dark threats coming from the braying mob (I guess we have one too, now) suggest that if we don’t immediately forget the unprecedented ad hominem accusations and lies of its standard-bearer and jump on board, we are betrayers. I remain a principled defender of First Principles, and I admit to being more than a little disheartened at the results of this primary. And it is because I recognize that the real fuel behind the engine of First Principles today is conservatism that I am fully on the side of the intellectual wing of the Right—National Review, the Weekly Standard….you know, #NeverTrump. I love that there are millions who still believe in our First Principles, and see them as more important than one man. I am solidly with these folks. The truth is that if there is to be any hope of salvaging our country, it will be through a return to these First Principles. Several other writers in this movement have beautifully articulated the #NeverTrump position, and I deeply respect it. To be honest, a big part of me wants to embrace it. But after the GOP convention adjourns in July, I believe that we who comprise this intellectual Right are in danger of betraying our own First Principles by applying a Primary Election mentality to a General Election reality. I know that Trump supporters can’t read this many words, so this is primarily aimed at those who wish to take political action that is rooted in critical thought and engagement—rather than reactionary bellowing and placard-waving, which used to be the modus operandus of only the Alinsky-ite Left. I speak to those who, like me, loathe the candidacy of Mr. Trump and the dangerously democratic mob that comprises his followers. I have a lot of other things I should be working on right now, but I feel that my duty to my country is to communicate this. I do apologize for the Matt Walsh-like verbosity, but please hear me out. And remember that, like all good conservatives, I appreciate discourse—unlike liberals, I don’t seek to shut it down. I am open to having my mind changed on this topic, because I believe that truth is more important than my own feelings. Feel free to engage me….but hear me out first.

Our Founders created a system that holds two ideas in tension: the individual liberties of the people and the authority of the state to hold them together as one indivisible unit. In order to accomplish both, they designed a republic, rather than a democracy. This means that there is a layer of representation between the braying mob and the levers of governmental power. Considering that the braying mob changes its fickle mind every four years—the same rationale for electing Barack Obama in 2008 forms the argument for electing Donald Trump in 2016—this is for the protection of the minority. In the first two decades after the Founding, two groups of citizen-leaders emerged: one that favored more of a bias toward centrality and statism, and one that favored more of a bias to decentralized power and federalism. The former became what we call Democrats, which is appropriate since they are still the ones crying about the electoral college and a Congress that won’t just rubber-stamp whatever The Chosen One pontificates about. The latter group were Federalists, who eventually found a manifestation in Republicans. While the Founders did not establish “parties,” per se, their desire was that these two ideas were held in tension—therefore, parties resulted, and necessarily so. Now, contra to Trump’s low-IQ understanding of the system, “the people” don’t choose the party nominee: the party does. This is what happened in Colorado and Wisconsin, where only those registered as Republicans could vote in the primary. Meanwhile, a significant number of early states allowed people to literally walk across the street from Democratic Party headquarters and vote in the Republican primary. This is how we ended up with Trump as a force so early. But what we must remember about the Founders is that they did not set up a nation of men but of LAWS. Therefore, the General Election is not an election for or against a man (or empty pantsuit, as in the case of Herself)—but for or against a set of principles that a party intends to become laws. This is called a “platform.”

Simply put, you vote your heart in the Primary, and your head in the General. In the Primary, you vote for the “man” because you are a party member who is deciding who will be the standard-bearer for the party ideals and principles. Then, in the General, you vote for the platform. This is how I’ve been able to hold my nose and vote for a Republican who instituted socialist health care in his state (Romney). This is how I’ve been able to groan audibly as I vote for a Republican who prides himself on opposing conservatism at every turn (McCain). This is how I gritted my teeth to vote for a Republican who sold out the first Republican majority in both house of Congress in 65 years to play patty-cake with Ted Kennedy on the largest entitlement bill in history (Bush). Believe me, in the Primary in each of those years I supported someone else. “Not getting the right guy” is nothing new to me. So what are those principles? What is that platform?

I’ve worked on the platform committee at county caucuses, helping to draft language that articulates our position on important policies. I know what it means to be involved, and by “involved” I don’t mean an idiotic “protest.” And I happen to know that the GOP platform, its ridiculous leadership notwithstanding, upholds limited constitutional government, the right to life, and the preservation of individual liberties. THAT’S what I’ve been voting for in these elections. And I’m not alone: conservatives have swept a vast majority (not even close) in state houses, gubernatorial races, and the House. They even finally took the Senate. They have dominated the precincts, counties, and states and are making progress at the national level. They just missed taking over the top of the party in this cycle, but they are a force to be reckoned with. Without them, you’d have union card check, legislated amnesty, single-payer health care, and quite possibly a Time cover picture of Barack Obama holding hands with Putin. There is absolutely no reason to hand this Presidential election over to a party that actually disinvited God to their last convention. In the system designed by our Founders, the President is our servant, not our boss. And we’re a pretty good boss, from the ground up to the White House. Perhaps we’ll get there next (think Reagan rising in 1976, then winning in 1980). Part of being a grownup is the ability and willingness to do your duty, no matter how unpleasant it is. Here are 4 reasons to reconsider that tantrum in November:

1.      You place the highest possible value on human life.

I agitated mightily against Trump in the Primary, because he’s a Democrat. He’s not the man I want representing our platform. But if he becomes the nominee, he immediately becomes the least important aspect of the election. The competing platforms take precedence. And let’s take a look at one extremely important decision that the winning party will make in January 2017: the replacement of a Supreme Court justice. Donald Trump could not have marched this far without having promised to represent the pro-life position of the GOP. He has promised to nominate a Supreme Court justice who will maintain the pro-life balance on the Court. Given his track record on integrity, do I believe him? Frankly, I have a hard time trusting him with anything. But I do know that BOTH candidates have to return to their principled base of voters to run for re-election in 2020. If Trump betrays his promise on the Court, what are his chances of being re-elected? And what are the chances that a man with that kind of ego won’t attempt re-election? Meanwhile, on the other side, we all know good and well what kind of Supreme Court justice Herself will be picking. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind. So this election will literally decide the fate of the next 56 million unborn children. It’s not about what an idiot Trump is, or how preternaturally Communist Herself is. It’s not about our bruised feelings from the Primary. It’s not about the betrayal of our Party. It’s about THE NEXT 56 MILLION UNBORN CHILDREN. And the ONLY chance they have is the party that has enshrined their safety in its platform.

Since 1972, those who love the Constitution have worked tirelessly to ensure that this “law” (which was never a law, by the standards of the Founders) is relegated to the trash heap of history. We have rightly seen abortion as the Holocaust of our day. We have disagreed on tax cuts and foreign policy and education but we have stood side-by-side in defense of human life and its highest possible value. I’m particularly chagrined at those fellow Christians who claim that their consciences will keep them from voting in this election:

Have you no conviction, sir? Have you no sense of duty, ma’am?

Trump is a moron. But of the two parties’ platforms competing in November, his is the only one that has promised to defend the unborn. If Herself is elected, the Court is permanently tilted toward the Mengele position of reprehensible slaughter. For that reason alone, we are called to stand up and speak for them. If you are one of those Christians who plan to sit this one out, or write in some “conscience vote,” please don’t identify yourself in public to those of us who are going to do our unpleasant duty for the sake of the next 56 unborn children. It will be very challenging to take you seriously when you speak of your faith forever afterward. To those of us who are grownups and understand this system and work within it, you will appear childish and utterly narcissistic, having mistakenly believed that a General Election vote had something to do with your “conscience.” The Primary was the time for your conscience. The convention in July is the time for your conscience. November is the time for ideas and principles. It is the time for 56 million unborn children. This is not about you; it is about them.  You vote “the man” in the Primary and “the platform” in the General.

2.      Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

There are MANY more instances in which Donald Trump is wrong, but there are a couple in which he managed to land backwards into a correct position. For starters, he correctly gauged the mood of the country where political correctness is concerned. After years of watching the Democrats and the Media (but I repeat myself) cheer riots, stoke racial unrest, and attempt to shoehorn a ridiculous Sociology Department myopia about history and race onto the rest of the country, the vast majority of Americans are sick of it. You want an example? Take me. I’ve NEVER been involved with the Klan, the John Birch Society, or any other racist faction. I despise the limited thinking that produces such idiots. If I could, I would put millions of miles of distance between me and anyone who thinks of himself as superior to another because of his race. But I also believe that individual liberties should be preserved. I believe that history shouldn’t be revised just because some Grievance Studies program at the university doesn’t find it convenient. And for these sins, I am regularly lumped with the knuckle-draggers by my Democrat friends. For decades, any time the Left is losing the argument, they shout “racist!” and the whole world is required to come to a quiet standstill. Most people are sick of this. Trump’s ability to refuse to be cowed by such talk is part of his appeal. I still believe that his response is childish and ignorant—and many of his followers are certainly dangerous Klan-loving morons. But his unwillingness to bow before the Speech Police is a necessary first step in dethroning them. They are as dangerous as Trump.

It feels like it’s been a long time since an American President loved his country. The Apology Tours, the obsequious bowing, the Marquise of Queensbury rules of military engagement, the hand-wringing over how we engage the enemy in combat, and the distaste for the concept of American sovereignty have become commonplace. And millions upon millions of Americans sit in stupefied silence as a President—seemingly fresh out of a Sociology Department tenure—does his dead-level best to take the country down a few notches. Trump is an inarticulate chucklehead, but he does manage to land with both feet on something that resonates with the vast majority of Americans: we love our country. We root for our country to succeed. It’s the actual job of an American president to put his own country’s needs first. The “America First” bit serves Trump well, because it’s still the way most of us feel about our country, warts and all. And we should—it’s the greatest country in the world! Citizenship is important.

3.      It’s the Republic, stupid!

For my money, the second-best outcome of a Trump presidency (after the 56 million unborn children) would be watching Democrats and the Media (but I repeat myself) suddenly rediscovering a love for a republic instead of a democracy. Suddenly, they wouldn’t be referring to congressional deliberation as “obstructionism.” Can you imagine your favorite Democrats all of a sudden learning that there are other MORE IMPORTANT elections than the Presidential one every four years? Can you picture them delegitimizing the judicial branch as the ultimate legislative power? Imagine a world in which Democrats and the Media (but I repeat myself) actually become familiar with high school civics class once again.

4.      The loss of political power.

Those planning on sitting out this election: let me ask you a question. Are you familiar with the term “down-ballot”? It turns out that Donald Trump and Herself aren’t the only ones running in November’s election. Many House members and a bunch of Senators are also running. Tons of state representative and state senators are running. There are governors running. Mayors running. City councilmen running. When the Democrats show up and dutifully pull their levers (which they ALWAYS do) for Democrats, and many Republicans stay home in a fit of pique, guess who really loses out? That’s right—YOU. Right now, Republicans control almost every aspect of government, from the local to the state house to the House of Representatives. They’ve captured the Senate, and fallen just short of the White House. But many of those people are running for re-election, and if you stay home, they lose. Now, I expect Democrats and the Media (but I repeat myself) to fallaciously believe that only Presidents have power—but you should know better. The Republic can survive a dumb President. We can’t have another 2-year stretch where the Democrats have actual control of the purse strings of government. The down-ballot races are significant, and you as a Republican are supposed to be the grownup who knows this. The checks-and-balances that our Founders established will prevent this guy from doing real damage, as long as Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell have the spine to hold him in check.

Mitt Romney lost in 2012 because conservatives stayed home—this is a well-documented reality. When The Chosen One should have been Jimmy Cartered from office for his dereliction of duty in Benghazi alone, conservatives handed him a fresh four years to lecture us some more about stuff he doesn’t know. To those of you who sat out in 2012: thanks a lot. Now please learn a lesson from it.

I’m not going to vote for Donald Trump in 2016. I AM going to vote for the GOP candidate, and my reasons for doing so are grownup reasons of duty, not personal satisfaction. Trump has said a lot of really dangerous and ridiculous things that should have disqualified him from office. He has behaved disgracefully and demonstrated a complete lack of integrity and character. The people he destroyed on his way to the nomination are people, and it is incumbent upon HIM to reconcile with them. I have little tolerance for TrumpTards lecturing us about party unity, when they showed so little desire for it for the last 6 months. And they’re going to have to figure out how to do it. It’s on them, not us. Moreover, until the last delegate folds in Cleveland, I will continue to work for someone other than Trump. But if he gets that nomination, it will then become time to be the grownups in the cafeteria and do our unpleasant duty. 1976 may be over, but 1980 is on the way.